How Would an NPC react to Housebreaking

[Laurellien]

So an issue has arisen in my game. The setting is the Isle of Dread (primitive Aztec villagers)

The village they were in has come under attack, and they have been sent by the chief to a nearby village to get help. It is about 2 in the morning when they arrive and a storm is raging, so they enter unnoticed.

They then went to the chief's hut and were denied entry by the guard because she was sleeping. Their response was for one of the PCs (a native half-giant) to grapple the guard, while another one (dressed in foreign clothes) entered.

They enter, with the fight still ongoing and now in the house, and the non-giant wakes the chief up. The chief turns around and screams "murder" as another half-giant in foreign garb enters the fray.

What would that chief then do if the waker sat down and tried to talk, while the grappling was still ongoing and there were two half-giants in her house?

(This has caused a big argument because I am of the opinion that she would grab a club and shield to defend herself until the village can rescue her, while the players think that she would be somehow reasonable having been startled awake with her bodyguard under attack by giants in the middle of the night).

[dream]

You're correct. The chief is your NPC. Play him as you like. In fact, have more guards arrive. Lots of them, since their leader is in danger.

[awa]

it depends on a few things
1 does she think she can take the party is she a least equal to her guard in skill
2 how close is back up if she thinks she would lose she might just buy time until back up comes
3 does she care what happens to the grappled guard
4 how xenophobic/ racist is she

I could see a couple of alternatives to a straight up attack take a full defensive action and talk bidding her time until back up comes if she is sneaky or outmatched

if she is arrogant or her backup is really close she may demand they throw down their weapons and she might spare their lives.

Unless the party has an overwhelming combat power that she is aware of I cant see how this ends well.

I don't know why the party is doing this but unless they have a very good reason any negotiation should auto fail. rulers don't get to stay rulers if they allow random strangers to burst into their room as they sleep.

[Hawkstar]

When I saw the title of the thread, I thought of the players trying to teach an NPC to not piddle on the carpet and play well with children.

[dream]

When I saw the title of the thread, I thought of the players trying to teach an NPC to not piddle on the carpet and play well with children.

Right

Or a random encounter with dancers. Great question being posed though.

[Vitruviansquid]

A village chief should, in my conception, be a bit more eager to receive strangers coming to visit. It should be fairly shameful for the chief of a village, often the post prosperous and wealthy person in it, to be unable or unwilling to show guests some generosity. It's kind of strange that a chief's guard would turn away travelers coming in the night because the chief is asleep rather than simply waking the chief up.

That said, it'd also be realistic for a village chief to be afraid of being attacked in the night by strangers who turn out to be malicious or be afraid of brigands. After all, in a small rural village, it's not like they can support professional soldiers and guards whose jobs it is to defend people and uphold the law - it's everyone's job.

So if the players want to argue anything, it's that they're being rudely turned away in the first place. But once rudely turned away, I don't see why they'd believe people wouldn't attack them for breaking and entering.

[Gritmonger]

If players are claiming good intentions, demand they show it by surrendering - weapons and all - and submitting to incarceration until divinations can be done to discern their true intentions. If the players acquiesce, the chief has the upper hand in having them surrender, and if everything is on the level they are vindicated by divination. Or a sending to the person they claim to represent.

Then they can argue rights of hospitality, and be told the proper etiquette and protocol for next time.

But they have caused a bit of a stir, so they can't just expect PC blinders to get them to the next person with an exclamation point over their head.

[Raphite1]

A chief who expected to keep the trust of her people, who ultimately depend on her for protection, would almost certainly have to execute people who did something like this once they were subdued by the guards. Maybe, if the perpetrators were found to merely be dangerous simpletons acting without malice (which your PCs seem to be), they could be banished on threat of death instead of executed outright.

Neither of those would prob be much fun or advance the game, though. Maybe have the guards subdue and imprison them until morning, and have the chief come and meet with them on her own terms. If they choose to fight and manage to kill all the guards... well, mission failure, and the campaign will have to be adapted.

[Laurellien]

it depends on a few things
1 does she think she can take the party is she a least equal to her guard in skill
2 how close is back up if she thinks she would lose she might just buy time until back up comes
3 does she care what happens to the grappled guard
4 how xenophobic/ racist is she

1) She does not think so because two of the home invaders are giant-sized and heavily armoured.
2) It's about 40' away in neighbouring huts
3) Yes, he's probably distantly related to her
4) Non-natives usually intend to steal or conquer, and there are natives who do that as well. In a peaceful context, she would happily sit and talk with strangers though. It's a matter of approach.

[dream]

It's about common sense: if someone broke in your house in the middle of the night, are you looking to make friends? Not if you're sane. You arm yourself and prepare to defend your home. Now, add that the OP world has monsters and bandits far worse than the modern world.

Yeah. The PCs made a mistake.

[Mr Beer]

Your choice, I would generally have the chief continue to actively defend against these dangerous assassins.

[Keltest]

Depending on her martial abilities she would either grab a weapon and start a clubbin, or cower in the corner while her guards a club (or get clubbed). Unless the person who woke her up has supernatural charisma, she would not be at all receptive to diplomacy at this stage.

Also, depending on just how Aztec like these villagers are, there is a nonzero possibility that if the party is captured they will be ritually sacrificed and pureed into the sun's coffee come morning.

[Berenger]

Depending on the personality of the leader, the cultures in question and many other factors, nearly every outcome between "the characters have to be executed for even touching our exalted leader" and "the characters and the leader will relax and cooperate as soon as this chaos is sorted out" is possible.

Grabbing her club and shield and shouting for help* is a good and reasonable move, but outright attacking the characters wouldn't be: the leaders main concern should be her (and her guards) survival, and duking it out with two armored half-giants all by her lonesome sounds like a rather bold move. Instead, she should retreat with her back to a wall, raise her shield and stay ready to fend off any intruder that approaches nearer than required for talking. Then she should talk, even if she doesn't trust those people at all: it buys her kin more time to notice the attack, arm themselves and rally to help her. If the characters claim to have good intentions, she can ask them to prove it by stopping to manhandle her guard. On the part of the characters, a statement among the lines of "We are terribly sorry to disturb you this way, but this is literally a matter of life and death. [Other chief] has sent us, [nearby village] is under attack!" would be in order. If this sounds supremely dubious due to the characters being from another culture, [other chief] should have provided them with some item or phrase that confirms the authenticity of the message in the first place. Since [other chief] presumably had a reason to think that the female leader would risk her and her kins life to help him against that attack, she probably cares about him and should consider the possibility of the characters actually telling the truth very carefully before dismissing it.



*This depends a bit on the situation, can her shout even be heard over a "raging storm"?

[goto124]

*This depends a bit on the situation, can her shout even be heard over a "raging storm"?

Roll Listen checks!

[Laurellien]

Roll Listen checks!

Indeed, checks were made.

The way the village is laid out is that there are four small hamlets around a central pyramid. Each hamlet belongs to a different clan. The chief lives in the hamlet of clan A, whose leader is a high-enough level ranger to have heard her over the storm. The ranger has woken his clan and sent runners to the other three sites. So within a minute there are about 10 armed warriors and 20 armed commoners, and in another 3-4 minutes that will rise to 40 warriors and 80 commoners, with also another 3 rangers of about 6th-10th level, and a necromancer of a similar level with about 20 zombies.

I think I'm leaning towards the chief talking to buy time but with no sincerity (sense motive checks will ascertain this). Even though the PCs can prove that they come with the authority of another chief, the extremely assassinationy circumstances mean that she will not treat with them. Once a few minutes have passed and she has 120+ armed men and women outside, and some very tough zombies with a spell caster, then she will be in a position to tell them to get out or die (the commoners will probably form into two angry mobs if they don't comply).

[Whyrocknodie]

Do you want this village to come to the aid of the earlier village that has come under attack?

If you do, the chief realises they really do mean to negotiate and they come to an understanding after some initial tension.

If you don't, they get attacked by the warriors and zombies.

[dream]

Indeed, checks were made.

The way the village is laid out is that there are four small hamlets around a central pyramid. Each hamlet belongs to a different clan. The chief lives in the hamlet of clan A, whose leader is a high-enough level ranger to have heard her over the storm. The ranger has woken his clan and sent runners to the other three sites. So within a minute there are about 10 armed warriors and 20 armed commoners, and in another 3-4 minutes that will rise to 40 warriors and 80 commoners, with also another 3 rangers of about 6th-10th level, and a necromancer of a similar level with about 20 zombies.

I think I'm leaning towards the chief talking to buy time but with no sincerity (sense motive checks will ascertain this). Even though the PCs can prove that they come with the authority of another chief, the extremely assassinationy circumstances mean that she will not treat with them. Once a few minutes have passed and she has 120+ armed men and women outside, and some very tough zombies with a spell caster, then she will be in a position to tell them to get out or die (the commoners will probably form into two angry mobs if they don't comply).

This makes the most sense. Giving the PCs one well-RPed chance to convince the chief they are sincere. If they role-play it well, give 'em a bonus to their Diplomacy/whatever roll. If they make it, the chief relents (but he'd still be a little P.O.). If they fail the check, toss the PCs outta town.

[tomandtish]

Indeed, checks were made.
I think I'm leaning towards the chief talking to buy time but with no sincerity (sense motive checks will ascertain this). Even though the PCs can prove that they come with the authority of another chief, the extremely assassinationy circumstances mean that she will not treat with them.

This is a good point to remember. After all, all the authority of the other chief means is that now they are "officially sanctioned" assassins, if that's how this chief interprets the events. In short, it changes the incident from the party acting stupidly to one of diplomatic envoys potentially creating a scenario for war.

[Berenger]

I think this decision is quite harsh. It's not implausible, but if the players perceive a certain pig-headedness or even malignance in the leaders behaviour, it will be really hard to argue against this perception. Also, the assumption of a more considerate reaction wasn't exactly unreasonable, even if it didn't prove true. Also, the culture in question seems to be quite prone to politically motivated assassinations if this is the only explanation that makes sense to the leader.

[BWR]

PCs messed up big time. No way breaking and entering and using violence to subdue guards is met with "good morning, how can I help you?" by almost anyone, especially not on the Isle of Dread.
No way is attacking the appropriate response to "sorry, the boss is sleeping so I'm not gonna wake her" instead of "but it's an emergency! there's an attack on the neighboring village right now!"
PCs/players messed up and need a reality check if they think this is ok behavior.

[dream]

PCs messed up big time. No way breaking and entering and using violence to subdue guards is met with "good morning, how can I help you?" by almost anyone, especially not on the Isle of Dread.
No way is attacking the appropriate response to "sorry, the boss is sleeping so I'm not gonna wake her" instead of "but it's an emergency! there's an attack on the neighboring village right now!"
PCs/players messed up and need a reality check if they think this is ok behavior.

I'm a fan of Player Agency and I support this message

[Knaight]

I'd say there are a few likely scenarios, none of which are a polite reception. The one where the chief arms themselves and joins the fight is entirely likely. The one where they stay back and just call for more guards is likely. I'd also add just running as a likely scenario though - a few giants busted into the hut, easily subdued the guards, and consider the situation under control enough that they are trying to talk. Running is entirely sensible even if the chief is a capable fighter.

There also is the possibility that a talk would happen. Said talk would likely resemble surrendering more than a spirit of cooperation, and while it might be possible to get help for the village, that's only because the chief feels threatened. Even in this situation, the PCs have likely made a new enemy.

[Jay R]

Different people would react differently. You know the NPC's character, and we don't.

You chose one of several legitimate reactions, and that's the one that happened this time. There is nothing wrong with giving a tribal leader a tribal mentality.

Frankly, I think the PCs would be captured and put on trial, as criminals and potential enemies of the tribe.

[Keltest]

Different people would react differently. You know the NPC's character, and we don't.

You chose one of several legitimate reactions, and that's the one that happened this time. There is nothing wrong with giving a tribal leader a tribal mentality.

Frankly, I think the PCs would be captured and put on trial, as criminals and potential enemies of the tribe.

I think it is rather more likely they would be executed on the spot unless they were to deliberately and clearly surrender, and even then there is a very good chance for execution without a trial.

However that could in itself lead to an interesting scenario. Perhaps someone in the village recognizes them as not-assassins, and takes subtle steps to allow them an escape attempt so they can go do their thing elsewhere. Give the PCs a chance to live while still having consequences for being dumb (those consequences being no help for the village and theyre wanted criminals).